Does anyone else find themselves desperately trying to get to the end of this crap? It’s like being in a terrible nightmare that keeps getting worse everytime I turn the page. In the book the material is presented in Themes but make no mistake, these are clearly nightmares…Each Nightmare Theme includes its own set of tremors…observe… Heuristic Driven Bias: The First Nightmare Tremor a - Representativeness Termor b - Overconfidence Tremor c - Anchoring and Adjustment, Conservatism Frame Dependence: The Second Nightmare I just know Freddy Kruger is going to jump out of somewhere with his crazy hand or that guy with the mask. This stuff is awful ! I know now for sure I will never marry a psychologist.
haha, sorry not really laugh at you but with you ,… this is only the start … it is much the same in other texts. it is much of a nightmare from now until June. the only escape is sleeping and I just had hours of glorious sleep as my brain has been hurting from similar experiences read here in the past week.
I haven’t gone passed SS4 yet, but so far, LIII seems fluffy compared to LII.
Agreed. I’m starting to get a little further into Book 2 and relieved to see at least so far it’s getting away from all that heuristic crap at the begining of the Book. It’s more light reading. But that stuff at the begining of Book 2 was awful. I tried reading it from “right to left” and even upside down just incase it made more sense.
hehehe I just finished session 3 and agree a nightmare! And the last sentence in reading 13 goes something like that: We know that the theories that we just told you about are probably wrong and that new theories will emerge. What the FuC**??? ARE you kidding me with this…? Now turning over to Stalla this reading is only 16 pages… yayks!
Somehow I enjoyed behavioural finance though… it’s like reading a novel anyway, no formulas to remember (although i am from a quantitative background). Iwona… > new theories will keep emerging, that’s a part of evolution… all we can do know is get to know the best of our time, which is good enough to make us good $$$
hehe I know that makes sense, it’s just a weird conclusion to end a chapter with…
its mind boggling stuff!!! cant figure out whats written in thid module:(
jmychasi Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > This stuff is awful ! I know now for sure I will > never marry a psychologist. I always get to be the voice of experience on AF and I have some experience on this one. Marrying a psychologist is the smartest thing you could ever possibly do.
JoeyDVivre Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > jmychasi Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > This stuff is awful ! I know now for sure I > will > > never marry a psychologist. > > I always get to be the voice of experience on AF > and I have some experience on this one. Marrying > a psychologist is the smartest thing you could > ever possibly do. Watching physchologist Dr. Phil going to see Brittany in the hospital makes you wonder if a physcologist was needed to visit Dr. Phil at the hospital.
trust me on this…you might find it boring right now, but come may you’ll be praying they put behavioral questions on the written. that was the only slam dunk question on last years morning session. wait till you guys hit the IPS stuff…
UAECFA Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > JoeyDVivre Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > jmychasi Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > > > > This stuff is awful ! I know now for sure I > > will > > > never marry a psychologist. > > > > I always get to be the voice of experience on > AF > > and I have some experience on this one. > Marrying > > a psychologist is the smartest thing you could > > ever possibly do. > > > Watching physchologist Dr. Phil going to see > Brittany in the hospital makes you wonder if a > physcologist was needed to visit Dr. Phil at the > hospital. I’m not sure what a “physchologist” is, but Dr. Phil is an anthropologist or something not a psychologist.
exotic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Somehow I enjoyed behavioural finance though… > it’s like reading a novel anyway, no formulas to > remember (although i am from a quantitative > background). > Iwona… > new theories will keep emerging, that’s > a part of evolution… all we can do know is get > to know the best of our time, which is good enough > to make us good $$$ If you think “A survey of Behavioral Finance” is like reading a novel, I think you are nuts! I couldn’t make any sense of the greeks in that reading, not to mention the connections of scores of researches with all so confusing heuristics. Agreed that we don’t need to remember all those formulas, but it is part of required reading, and I don’t know what kind of questions CFAI might ask from this stuff.
Mr. SanFran (Joe M.) fluffy is what makes this one a b*tch. Wait until the deriv stuff. Calcs not the issue, crazy questions are…